Bradford: How good was he last year?
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 1:42 AM CST
Email
PrintShort answer: not as good as you think.
Sam the Ram takes home the Offensive Rookie of the Year and we all celebrate. Good day to be a Rams fan and very nice award for our top pick. I can't believe no one else has mentioned this, but I have a few performance metrics that many Rams' fans may not want to see.
2. Maybe his DVOA was at least high? Nope. Still ranks 34th in DVOA.
3. Anyone want to mention that his yards per completion were the second LOWEST in the NFL behind only Jimmy Claussen?
So, before we start notching up the turnaround to Sam's great year, remember that the Rams probably would have been better off with 7th rounder Ryan Fitzpatrick commanding the team. Think about it: how many fans perceptions of Bradford vs. Fitzpatrick are based only the fact that Fitzpatrick was drafted later? Almost all. (I know they are in different stages of their careers, but I bet many people would not believe Fitzpatrick outplayed Bradford this year.)
Objectively, Sam simply was not as good as he is being given credit for. I said many times, the defense was the primary reason for the turnaround this season, but it is just easier (and sexier) to give the credit to the #1 draft pick QB than to say that a guy like Ron Bartell is playing at an All-Pro level.
I ain't hatin', I'm just sayin'.
154 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don't care about those stats
Sam Bradford is a leader and he changed the attitude of the players surrounding him.
What about Fitzpatrick/McCoy/Smith/Wallace/Stanton?
Do any of them have leadership qualities? (Probably, yes.) Did our players, who have dedicated their entire lives to football, have a change in attitude when a ROOKIE came in? (Probably not.)
You have to look at performance on the field. The “intangibles” card is a cop out.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 11:03 AM CST up reply actions
It does sound like your hatin because.....
U just compared VET to a ROOKIE so lets break this down a lil for you.
St. Louis’s offense was based around the dink and dunk and when you have WR that can’t run after the catch then i’m guessin your yard per play is gonna suffer.
Lets also mention that he had CRAP for WR who could hold onto the ball on long balls if they’re life depended on it! (week 17)
Lets also mention that his TOP TWO WR went down in Preseason and almost half through the season!
If we would have won in seattle and been in the playoffs you would have been all over Sam saying how good he is and you should.
Look at his surrounding cast(WR) and you tell me wat he did this season wasn’t great.
Yes the D did great and i give them credit but you also have to give credit.
We aren't the only team
to run a dink and dunk offense with poor WRs.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 11:04 AM CST up reply actions
We aren't?
You could name some then?
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
by Blair Rocket on Feb 5, 2011 12:11 PM CST up reply actions
I don't about being worse than ours, but
the Panthers, Browns, Jaguars didn’t have too much to speak of. The Bucs and Chargers had good TEs, but not great WRs.
Our WRs were definitely among the league’s worst, if not the worst, though.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
Chargers have Floyd,
Tampa Bay has Mike Williams. Heck of a lot better then anyone we got.
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
Mike Williams? Are you serious?
You mean the 4th round pick Mike Williams? Seems to me like Freeman had to do with his success as a rookie. I will agree that Floyd is a ton better than anyone on the Rams at wide receiver.
Who on the Rams is better then Mike Williams?
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
by Blair Rocket on Feb 6, 2011 11:58 AM CST up reply actions
My point was
Freeman turned a 4th round pick into a stud. Bradford was good but didn’t turn anyone into a stud like Freeman did with Williams. The equivalent would have been if Gilyard had a stud-like season bc of his chemistry with Bradford but that didn’t happen. Also, Clayton when he wasn’t injured was better.
no
williams was considered a first round talent before he quit the syracuse football team. no one ever considered mardy a first rounder
if you go that route then
Danario Alexander was considered a first round talent too, and he only had one good game.
also note
That the Rams passed on Williams for Gilyard so obviously he wasn’t a top notch talent and with Freeman certainly had to do with some of his production.
another reason why the 4 pillars
need to be bent but not broken
That's the not point,
Mike Williams is a good wr and would be our number 1 if he played for us.
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
would he have been as good
if he was on the Rams? You can’t say that he would have been our number one considering all the dink and dunking Shurmur/ Spags did.
Did you ever think
that the dink and dunking was a result of not having a true number 1?
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
Dink and Dunk
is what the west coast offense is. You can call deep routes to keep the defense honest with any wide receiver.
How does that make any sense?
Why send a wr to go deep, when he doesn’t have good deep ball skils? Who on the team can go deep and make plays consistently that would make a defense honest? In the future we might have that guy in DX, but last year we really didn’t have a consistent deep ball threat.
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
why send a man deep?
To take a safety out of the box and possibly open up some space so we can pick up more than 5 yards. Also, this opens up the running game if you throw the ball deep every now and then because the safeties can’t always play the run or the 5 yard slant pass. Do you watch football to understand what at least sending a receiver down field does for a team?
You're the one that doesn't understand
and still hasn’t answered "who do we have that can go deep?
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
you can send anybody deep
Danario Alexander, Amendola, Robinson, Gibson, UhOh, Clayton, are all receivers who can run a deep route.
the problem is that none of those guys
warrant a safety over the top, maybe clayton. so we send a guy deep that can get shut down one on one. yeah that will work
you dont think that when
one of those long balls is caught that the safety will drop back and respect the passing game? It only takes one long pass play for them to take 8 men out of the box.
haha not at all
why would you spare a safety if the receiver only gets like 2 balls a game.
i agree we need to open up the field and go deep but we need a receiver that can get open. Mike Williams would have been a huge help for this team. a reliable receiver who can run a route and actually catch.
2 balls
That both could go for touchdowns? Hmm…seems like a reason why a safety would come out of the box.
hahaha touchdowns
i think the db will prolly make a better play on the ball then our great wrs. we’ll end up with more picks than tds, and thats one on one coverage. not to mention tossing incompletes deep downfield all game wastes plays and opportunities. doesnt really help unless we have a threat
you are missing the point
The fact that deep throws will open up the field regardless of what wide receiver goes deep and not every time the Packers, Patriots, or Falcons throw deep it is caught. But I’d rather have some incomplete deep passes thrown so the safety does and will play back at least some of the time instead of have 2 yard completions and guarantee that the safeties can play in the box.
again why spare a safety if
our wrs cant beat a one on one. you need a guy that can get open on a streak before you call a streak. why respect a vertical game if you have more confidence in you corner than our wr.
you are telling me
That none of our wide recievers could ever beat a cornerback one on one ever last year? You have no idea what you are talking about. Even if they beat them 1 out of 6 times the safety has to respect that and will play back. How can you argue that logic that throwing the ball deep to anyone will pull a safety out of the box. Its like leaving Ron Artest open for a 3, if he makes one or 2 then the defense will play up on him rather than double Kobe. The same is to be said with sending a receiver deep. You can’t argue that logic. I know our wide outs weren’t the best but they can and did get open on one on one coverage even if it was less than most receivers in the league and that WILL pull a safety out of the both.
and you think one safety out of the box opens much up
you gotta be joking right. the players rotate to fill the void. who cares if there is 9 or 8 in the box.. one safety deep doesnt change much for an underneath passing game. yea they might be the coverage 1 out of 6, but noone said they would actually catch the ball or look over the right shoulder or whatever. none of our receivers, except clayton and avery even remotely require double coverage.
One less player
For Jackson or any receiver to break a tackle to get more than a 5 yard gain. I honestly don’t see how you don’t understand that. You are saying that we should never throw the ball long and continually throw 4-5 yard pass plays. Wow, I’m glad you aren’t on the coaching staff.
Yes we do I haven't denied that
But it still helps to throw the ball deep regardless of wide receivers! Lets end this as I feel its come to a close
A safety isn't going to fear a wr going deep
if that wr isn’t good at going deep. Just like a basketball player isn’t going to be afraid of a bad 3 point shooter shooting a 3. Defenders let Rajon Rondo shoot long jumpers, because the chances are good he won’t make it.
This has gotten to the point when no one is going to change their mind, so “lets end this as I feel its come to a close.”
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
by Blair Rocket on Feb 10, 2011 5:36 PM CST up reply actions
Only 1 good game?
That means that 2 of these 3 games weren’t good:
72 yards, TD vs Chargers
95 yards vs Broncos
99 yards vs 49ers
Using your logic
Joe Montana was solely responsible for making Jerry Rice a great wr.
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
also there is a massive difference
Jerry Rice was the best wide receiver to play the game, and yes having an all time great like Joe Montana helps quite a bit.
You're saying it was all Freeman,
and that’s why Williams had the year he had. Williams had to get open and catch the ball. The quarterback isn’t the only reason a wr has a good season.
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
Montana was an average QB
Rice and Taylor, along with the Walsh system, made Montana. It’s no coincidence that Montanas career was over when Walsh retired.
Wolf. Wolfgang Wolf
He's in the hall of fame,
but yeah Joe Montana was so average.
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
I watched him play
I watched him dozens of times. On an average team he’d have been average and not in the HOF.
Wolf. Wolfgang Wolf
Just don't build a house in San Fran with a sign on your door
that says “Joe Montana was average.”
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
The nfl network ranked him as the 4th best
player of all time.
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
You've convinced me
he’s definitely in the top half of all the players who ever played. I’m really working on being open minded, definitely he’s better than Keith Null.
Wolf. Wolfgang Wolf
No problem
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
by Blair Rocket on Feb 11, 2011 12:51 PM CST up reply actions
That will not do...
…admit it! Ours were THE WORST! Admit it damn it!
And there wasn’t a close second either.
by Pekka for Predator Pontiff on Feb 6, 2011 2:00 PM CST up reply actions
Take into consideration
the fact that Sam had no one to throw it to. Obviously, he would have had much better stats if he had receivers who could run and catch.
And don’t worry, you’re not hating. Being the devil’s advocate and getting people to think is good every now and then.
I bet Sarah Palin can learn a playbook faster than Mardy Gilyard.
Just Saying
Fitzpatrick turned Stevie Johnson into a stud wide receiver. Don’t get me wrong, Bradford was the right choice and played great this season but he isn’t the only reason we went 7-9. The MAIN REASON was how much our defense improved. Our offense still is nowhere close to being highpowered and I think that given a few more weapons and some guards to open up the running lanes we will get there. Much credit on our record goes to the defense not the offense.
+1
Thanks for not drinking the Kool-Aid richter
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 11:05 AM CST up reply actions
Give credit where its due
Bulger did go to 2 pro-bowls and watched his team deteriorate around him. He saw numerous dumbfounded draft picks that never panned out. The only good draft pick during Bulger’s time was Steven Jackson. He took it like a man and saw us through some high times and the rough times and not once complained. Bulger was a class act and I wish him the best, except when he plays the Rams of course.
and one
Pro-Bowl MVP
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 11:05 AM CST up reply actions
Stats don't lie
I’ll give you that, but I’ll take Rookie Sam Bradford over experienced Fitz any day of the week. As stated above, his offensive supporting cast was “practice squad quality” at best, and don’t forget about the pathetic interior line play that basically put every game after the bye on Sam’s shoulders since we couldn’t block a piss-ant from getting penetration, much less an NFL quality DT.
For Sam to get the stats he DID get was nothing short of amazing, and top that with being a rookie.
Now let’s get into the intangibles, which I might ad, does NOT show up on paper.
Sam’s heart, drive, and determination to win is nothing like I have ever seen in a QB on the Rams since Kurt Warner. Rewind the game film and watch Sam run down Harper.
How about the rollout where he totally manipulated the Safety in the end zone on that touchdown pass to Fells (who?)
We can even rewind all the way back to Sam’s first NFL start of his career… in pre-season against the Patsies where they kept their starters in, and Sam totally dissected their defense (pre-season I know, BUT STILL).
(Speaking of the rollout, with our interior O-Line, Sam rolling out bought the extra time he needed… it will be scarey when he can sit in the pocket and have that amount of time won’t it?)
Our defense made a HUGE rebound yes, but don’t discredit Sam by looking at DVOA when he had no one to throw to, nor half the time other QB’s get to even throw it to begin with.
I know you’re not hatin’ but you have to look at the bigger picture here :-) Thanks for the awesome post!
Pooch punts should be illegal inside an opponents 38 yard line.
by VTramsFan on Feb 5, 2011 8:15 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
This is why I love this site
I don’t have to be the only person to defend my team and players anymore. Everyone here knows just as much as me and that’s a good feeling. I know this is irrelevant, but greats posts to everyone.
Saying his
“heart, drive, and determination” are better than any QBs since Warner is pretty suspect. You just can’t know that stuff.
The interior line was brutal at run blocking (mostly Goldberg, although Bell didn’t help much, and Brown could get pushed around too) but I think they did a pretty good job with pass protection.
Obviously, I hope he continues to progress. We may not really know what kind of QB he will be until a couple of years from now. Getting him some talent at WR will definitely help allow his skill to show more clearly. Of course, QBs need time to develop, I am not condemning Sam to a career of mediocrity, he had a decent season, for a rookie.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 11:12 AM CST up reply actions
Why is that "suspect"?
I honestly never saw that with Bulger. I liked Bulger, but he always lacked that leadership quality. I definitely stand behind that statement.
Pooch punts should be illegal inside an opponents 38 yard line.
you can't know that stuff?!
Do you see how the 49ers respond to Alex Smith? or how the Cardinals respond to their QB situation? The way we looked with Boller, Null, Berlin, Fitzpatrick, and Bulger these past years? The whole team changed..
Sam the MAN! GIANTS WIN THE WORLD SERIES!!!!!!!
by loyal2therams on Feb 6, 2011 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
You can't know
Only the guys that played will really know. I have played on a lot of teams and very often the guy that may appear to be the leader, the vocal guy, is the guy that no one will ever listen to. Not always, but it happens. It is unfair to the other guys that have quarterbacked this team to say that Sam has more heart. Those other guys have devoted their lives to football, too.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 6, 2011 4:50 PM CST up reply actions
I base my opinion on Sam's leadership on comments from his teammates.
To a man they all consistently commented on the impact Sam had on their outlook and expectations. The players can see hoe good he is and how hard he works. I think it’s safe to say Sam had a greater impact on team morale than any of the other QBs over the past few years.
Prove it
Give me a couple links. I am sure I can find some articles about Bulger’s great leadership, too. It’s a sports cliche that gets perpetuated because the writers want something easy to write about and the players want something easy to talk about. That way, no one has to do any real thinking.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 3:11 PM CST up reply actions
Bradford isn't out of the woods but, it's a good start.
Like I have been hammering home all year “we were completely inept at the WR position.” Amendola is nice to have but should be no more than a small cog in the machine. Sam made good decisions with the ball, showed toughness and leadership and I don’t think you can ask for much more from a rookie. Give him some quality receivers and I think our offensive line will look a lot better even without any additions. I didn’t see much pressure until Sam approached the 4 second mark waiting for someone to get open down field. Often times no one did and that’s when he got crushed. My opinion is this… if we don’t get a couple solid receivers, it won’t matter what we do with the offensive line; the results will be the same.
Ignorance is bliss and way too many people are happy.
yeah bradford only threw for 3500 yards as a rookie
Sure isn’t an amazing feat but I’d take that any day, seeing how only one other rookie in NFL history has done better than that so far.
It is because of Sam
Sam gave this team hope, he came in and the hype he had helped the team to believe they aren’t gonna lose everygame anymore.
You are
delusional
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 2:58 PM CST up reply actions
Even though most of Bradford's attempts were short passes
He still did a good job with pass attempts/interceptions (around 40). For reference, Peyton Manning, Phillip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers were around 40 as well. I think as a rookie he did a good job with ball protection, and moved the chains in the absence of a strong running game.
You do realize that Sam broke a bunch of records right?
He was on fire all year, he did bring hope and confidence to the team. I also don’t see how you could see a quarterback who broke pretty much all of the rookie qb records that Peyton Manning set. You know who Peyton Manning is right? Been to the Super Bowl a couple times and has made his team dominate. You have to think of that is Bradford had a bad year then how did he break all those records? And he went 4 or 5 games I think without an inception.
Thanks for the read. You should check out my website http://dmattox.webs.com/
Ou first, Sam Bradford second, Rams 3rd
The only reason I paid any attention what so ever to the Rams was because of Sam Bradford. Now stats are fine and I do get what this poster was saying but stats are not everything. Lets look at reality and that is do you honestly believe that a good quarterback 3 to 4 years in the NFL would have signed up with a 1-15 team of any kind? no they would not have. There is a reason why Sam Bradford was the starting quarterback and not the vet back up and that’s because he is a great quarterback. If the vet quarterback was better then Bradford don’t you think he would be playing? yes he would and Sam would be the one sitting down. If your going to compare stats then compare him with other starting rookie quarterback not 3 or 4 year vets. I think if Sam was a normal NFL rookie quarterback you would probably not even have the 7-8 record you would would probably be at 2-15 because no matter how good the defense is playing if the offense can’t score points then the team will still end up with a horrible record. If you dismiss the intangibles simply because you can put a number on them mean that you don’t really understand football. The stats come after the game not before what separates the greats from the Ok quaterback is passion for the game, heart and determination. If you look at Elie Manning and Tom Brady and you will see what I mean yes they have awesome beast like stats but that comes after the game. Sam has a true passion for the game of football, he also has the heart and determination. The game will be slowed down for him in the 2011 season it was starting to slow for him in the 2010 season. Now the defense was stepped up for the rams and that’s because if feeds off the offense and the offense feeds off the quaterback for good or bad if you don’t understand what I’m talking about look at the quarterback for the 2009 season then the quarterback for the 2010 season and I’m willing to bet you’ll see what I’m talking about. You can have good stats but if you don’t have any real passion, heart or determination for the game you really won’t go far on any level you play as a quarterback.
by Freewheeler2 on Feb 7, 2011 11:45 AM CST up reply actions
When you say the defense was the major reason for the improved record,
you are ignoring the fact that the offense averaged 7 points per game more than 2009. And since we made very few significant changes in our offensive personnel other than Bradford, he has to be seen as the main reason for that increase.
Sure, the defense improved dramatically, and that was a big part of the improvement, but you just can’t ignore an increase of 7 points per game by the offense – mostly the result of Bradford.
Offense and defense are interrelated, bud
Better field position makes it easier to score. Forcing 3 and outs and getting the ball back quicker makes it easier to score. You are ignoring the connectedness of offense and defense in football and looking at it on the surface.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 4:16 PM CST up reply actions
And so are you.
A better offense that controls the ball longer and allows the defense to rest helps the defense do a better job. Everyone noted all year the better ball control by the offense, allowing the defense to be better rested and not worn out by the end of the game.
by andyhawk on Feb 5, 2011 4:32 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Except that
you can’t justify Sam’s poor performance in the metrics that I listed
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 11:50 PM CST up reply actions
And you can't use some obscure metrics
to outweigh setting the record for passes completed by a rookie QB and an increase of 7 points per game in the Rams scoring. Nor can you use them to override the near unanimous comments from experts inside and outside the league that he had one of the most impressive rookie years for a QB in a long time.
If your point is that Bradford was not good enough this year to be considered one of the top QBs in the league, we have no quarrel. If your point is that Bradford was one of the worst starting QBs int he league, then I think you are in a tiny minority and I don’t agree with you.
You are right
I don’t think that he is one of the worst in the league, but I do think it is a gross simplification and inaccurate to say that the reason we won more games this year was 1. Bradford
2. Bradford
3. Bradford
He was better than Null, about as good as Bulger was last when Marc was healthy, and a little better than Boller.
The main point I was trying to make is that the perception often trumps reality. The perception for many is that Bradford was this God-send who transformed everything about the Rams. I think that does not give near enough credit to every other player on that roster of 52 who worked to make the team better.
Sam
1. Was a rookie
2. Had a poor (potentially league-worst) receiving corps
3. Was often called upon to just throw simple, short passes
So, his stats are not going to be the best, but I thought it was surprising how poorly he fared by some metrics and realized that somehow, no one mentioned it. I guess it was because either 1) No one saw it or 2) thought that people would blow up and just see that someone said that Bradford wasn’t great.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 6, 2011 4:47 PM CST up reply actions
So,
you’re saying if we had Alex Smith instead of Bradford we would have been better then 7-9?
If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
It is
a possibility. Obviously, you can’t know that for sure- maybe better, maybe the same or maybe worse. I think the Rams would’ve had the same record, personally.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 6, 2011 9:50 PM CST up reply actions
I agree with you that
Bradford was not one of the top QBs in the league this year, and that other parts of the team also improved and made a contribution to the improved record. On the other hand, Bradford was clearly not one of the worst QBs in the league, either. He was somewhere in the middle, which is pretty good for a rookie QB. And his potential for moving up to be one of the elite QBs is there, where it isn’t for many of the other QBs in the league.
Soooo, it’s good to be excited about the Rams potential with Bradford as QB going forward. He gives us real hope. If we can improve the rest of the team around him significantly, I can see the Rams being a winning team in a couple of years and for years to come. One guy can’t do it alone. It takes all the guys on the team to make it happen. But without an elite QB it’s much tougher, and Bradford has the potential to be that elite QB.
It’s great for Rams fans to have something to celebrate and be excited about after the last few years. If some of us tend to get a little too excited and exaggerate about the performance of our rookie QB, that’s not a big sin. Let’s have fun and feel great about the first real signs of improvement and hope in many years. It’s the front office that needs to be cold blooded and realistic when deciding where we go from here. GO RAMS!
Roger Saffold
You have to take into consideration second round pick Roger Saffold who helped solidify the pass protection. Also, you need to realize that our offensive line was finally healthy for the first time in 3 years and that plays a massive part in the improvement of the offense.
THIS GUY Marmie IS CRAZY!!!
1st of all Sam’s a Rookie it’s like telling a new guy at work,hey build this house with out any nails. yea he knows how to build it but he cant with out the tools, Ok so Sam did a lot of dink & donks but you act like he’s the head coach or the OC, he just went there & did what he was told to.
2nd nobody said anything about VICK when he trow a dink to D. Jackson and blow up the play for 20 plus yard, that happen a lot. but then again we don’t have a D.Jackson on are team so i rest my case there. And when we decided to go deep on a play, are WR decided to play hot potato at the wrong time.
This is the NFL i just want to know what kind of numbers you wanted to see him put up ? i think everybody talked so much about what a good job Sam did that everybody for got he’s a ROOKIE i think you for got to. All i have to say about Sam’s rookie season is not to shabby Youngster.
I am not saying that the defense did a good job cause we all know they did a great job this year, and the stats speak for them self but to try to put Sam down like that to me is disrespectful . The season he had was just fine to me and i and a lot of Rams fans where very happy for the way he played , not to say he didn’t play for a year in college and came in the NFL and broke ROOKIE records or tied some records, just saying.
Lets look it like this J.Mcd’s + Sam + 1# WR = Success. just wait into we get some tools for Sam then wait a season or 2 then you can bring this up, but not now are you for real come on man. but if you still want to Hate be my guess i love them & i think Sam did to..
PS. Congrats Sam again For the Award!
Ct
by Ct St.louis Rams on Feb 5, 2011 10:05 PM CST reply actions
I said that I understand he is a rookie
but he was also bottom of the barrel in a few VERY meaningful statistics. I mentioned both of those things in the original post.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 5, 2011 11:51 PM CST up reply actions
a few meaningful statistics that don't account for the talent of his team
“bottom of the barrell” – are you saying that’s how good he played? I’m just saying that there were substantial enough outside factors weighing him down that you could make a reasonable argument Bradford belongs in the Top 25 or higher
"And a boring game for boring people. Did you ever watch golf on television? It's like watching flies FUCK. Think of the intellect it must take to draw pleasure from this activity: hitting a ball with a crooked stick and then WALKING AFTER IT" -George Carlin
Sam had a fine rookie year and has a bright future
nuff said
by ramsfanman on Feb 5, 2011 10:24 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
If all we cared about was one season.
Yeah. I’d take Fitzpatrick over Sam.
Hell, I’d bring in old man Favre. (Brad Childress would hate the Rams)
The fact that Alex Smith had better stats than Bradford
Says more about stats in football than it does about who the better QB was.
not necessarily
stats don’t account for outside factors such as run game, wide receivers, protection, intangibles (this should NOT be the basis for why someone belongs on the team however but it certainly helps if they have good intangibles and Bradford apparently does)
"And a boring game for boring people. Did you ever watch golf on television? It's like watching flies FUCK. Think of the intellect it must take to draw pleasure from this activity: hitting a ball with a crooked stick and then WALKING AFTER IT" -George Carlin
Intangibles are absolutely important
especially with a QB with the tools of Bradford. Look at Cutler… he has the tools, but 0 intangibles. Just sayin’ :-) Totally agree with you
Pooch punts should be illegal inside an opponents 38 yard line.
i think you're picking the wrong bone
At the least, you are slightly hyperbolic in proving your point. I will agree most on this site strongly overrate his performance and since there is no way to quantify “heart, drive, and determination” it’s stupid to try to and use it as evidence, BUT you are taking a shot at Sam because for some reason you hate that everybody thinks he’s God – for some reason, it physically bothers you that TST thinks Sam is a 9 while you think he is a 5 (random arbitrary numbers to make a point for the record)
First of all, I think you are underrating how big of an impact not having a running game is. It’s absolutely terrible. Rams were 31st according to FO. Basically teams could prepare for the passing game and still absolutely dominate the running game because Bell/Goldberg couldn’t block me from getting Jackson (quite frankly, at that point he would kill me)
Let’s see – Drew Stanton – hmm.. well considering he has a 59.5% CP, 4 TDs, 3 INTs and Calvin Johnson on his team, I’m just going to guess that his YPA helped him out and he has Calvin f’n Johnson on his team – Did I mention he had just 61 attempts? So Stanton was better than Bradford in 2010 based of 61 attempts compared to 300+? You won’t convince me in a billion years that Stanton played better than Bradford
McCoy had the 16th best rushing game while Bradford had 31st – He also had Ben Watson – ranked NINTH in the NFL by DYAR – We had Fells (30th) and Hooma (not enough attempts to qualify – Also their receivers were no worse than ours
Wallace is a vet and very underrated and Fitzpatrick – well should we really be offended when he outperforms Bradford seeing as what he did – Alex Smith? just two spots ahead of Bradford and he has Vernon Davis and Michael Crabtree
I think I’ve proved my point. My question is this: Do you really think Bradford was the 34th best QB? Either way I think you’re screwed. Either you completely disregard outside factors and say yes (which honestly would make me question your thought process) or you say no and admit you were probably wrong in saying that Bradford was worse than your examples (with perhaps the exception of Fitz and Wallace)
"And a boring game for boring people. Did you ever watch golf on television? It's like watching flies FUCK. Think of the intellect it must take to draw pleasure from this activity: hitting a ball with a crooked stick and then WALKING AFTER IT" -George Carlin
judging by your reponses, you most definitely are hating
I’m just saying
"And a boring game for boring people. Did you ever watch golf on television? It's like watching flies FUCK. Think of the intellect it must take to draw pleasure from this activity: hitting a ball with a crooked stick and then WALKING AFTER IT" -George Carlin
Why the no response?
I guess you’re conceding that you are wrong in some aspect about how good he was (i.e. NOT 34th overall)
"And a boring game for boring people. Did you ever watch golf on television? It's like watching flies FUCK. Think of the intellect it must take to draw pleasure from this activity: hitting a ball with a crooked stick and then WALKING AFTER IT" -George Carlin
Look at it this way...
Fitzpatrick is a Veteran who is PEAKING, and Sam is a rookie who has his best days way ahead of him and yet there’s still an argument as to who had the better season LOL
Let’s move on please.
Pooch punts should be illegal inside an opponents 38 yard line.
Marmie is the best
Marmie is the best!
Christ if that isn’t an oxymoron I don’t know what is. Dude you try to post stuff that just pisses people off, especially me, and I’m sure plenty of other folks. I think since you are so old and crusty you just want to make post that gets a lot of response.
Maybe you should check into assisted living that is internet free. I know most of TST would appreciate you disappearing from this forum. You really don’t have any legitimate arguments for your crappie views other than "Marmie is the best". That just shows you’re a self-absorbed fruit cake who fell into the "I love me" category.
Your ridiculous diatribes that you post make me want to puke, and start a petition to have you banned from this web site.
"MY GOD MAN!" you are putting down the best thing STL has seen since Kurt Warner…..You are the Anti-Christ and I hope you just fade away and never post anything again.
The fact that
you don’t get the reference shows that you aren’t really that big of a Rams fan, so I don’t know why you are getting so upset over an internet football forum.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 6, 2011 4:39 PM CST up reply actions
Don't get me wrong
Bradford is a beast and had a hell of a rookie season and set a ton of records. That is a fact. What I think marmie is saying is that if you put in a group of other quarterbacks they could have lead the Rams to the same 7-9 record. Now I don’t believe Alex Smith could have taken us close to that record but I do believe if we had picked up McNabb or Campbell in free agency rather than drafting Bradford our record would have been the same as our defense improved drastically and our offensive line was healthy for the first time in 3 years. Did we make the right call by drafting Bradford, ABSOLUTELY. IMO marmie is stating that the Rams success is not solely b/c we had Bradford.
Thank you
At least one person actually READ what I wrote and responded accordingly. I never said that I didn’t like Sam or didn’t think that the he will be a very good NFL player, just that his performance this year, while good for a rookie, could have been accomplished by many QBs.
I’d hate to see what some of these others would score on a simple reading comprehension test.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 8:36 AM CST up reply actions
Of course.
The difference is that Sam gives us a future and McNabb or Campbell don’t. That said, he wasn’t nearly the best quarterback statistically. He will be in the future though.
"I kind of stepped my swagger up. You look at the Madden game and the swagger's so low, maybe they'll bump me up. Before it was a meatball flex, so you've got to liven it up a little bit." - Animal Jr.
I know that
If you read what I said, you would realize that is what I said. I said we made the right call by drafting Bradford and had a great rookie season but what marmie and myself were saying there was that McNabb or Campbell could have gotten us the 7-9 record last year. Bradford’s future is bright, no doubt in my mind but it takes 10 other players on offense and a solid defense to have the record we did, not solely did Bradford get us to 7-9.
his yards per completion were screwed for one reason
the damn west coast offense… wait til mcdaniels gets in there… hell be bommbin that ball down field and havin avery and clayton back will only help that cause (im about 110% sure clayton will re-sign)
exactly
I’m so glad the browns took shurmur off our hands so we can throw the ball deep before the 4th quarter. Also, with Avery and Clayton back our offense is alot more potent.
Other teams use the west coast offense too
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 8:34 AM CST up reply actions
Then
maybe a comparison among those teams would be more fitting. I think had you done a little more research you would’ve refrained from posting this. It’s easy to look at a set of stats already made and make accusations about the effectiveness of a player on a team, it’s hard to explain why. I think there are ample scenarios supporting Bradford as a standout performer within the league, given his success with the talent level around him/the scheme he was put under/the injury situations/etc.
VTramsfan does have a point. Bradford’s intangibles not only lifted the offense’s spirits (yes, even more than Fitzpatrick would’ve…I mean are you kidding me?) but also the defense’s. You can slant it to say Bradord was mediocre this year, but I’m in the firm belief that Bradford as a rookie was a top 12 QB on a bottom of the barrel offense. The D did emerge this year, and I understand how they helped, but to use that as ammo to say Bradford wasn’t the biggest part of our turn around is a stretch. Our defense may have been better than our offense but that doesn’t mean they were more important/effectual.
I’d take Bradford over every QB except Brady, Manning, Rivers, Brees, Rodgers, and Roethlisberger. Bradford was real good last year and anyone learning a new NFL playbook would’ve had some struggles as he did (something I think you should give a little more credit to) but few would have produced like he did.
Julio Jones for Rams 2011
Really?
Why is so hard to believe that Fitzpatrick could have better intangibles than Bradford? Fitzpatrick is a Harvard guy, 7th round pick, and had to be a 3rd stringer for awhile. I am not saying that Fitzpatrick IS better in intangible categories, but you have absolutely no idea.
The offense had it spirits lifted? Really? Jason Smith was all of sudden playing differently because he was blocking for Bradford? Please dude. It is insulting to the guys around him to say that their play changed because Bradford was the QB. Sure it is poetic to say that he had such great intangibles that everyone changed.
But really, just think about it. If you are one of those guys that has made the team, you have devoted countless hours of hard work to football. You aren’t going to start trying harder just because you have some new quarterback. It just isn’t going to happen. If Bradford was actually a very good QB last year, you would have something to point to, that Sam actually did, other than the flowery spirits being lifted.
This kind of thinking is exactly what I am talking about. Just because Sam is a #1 pick and the media has gushed over him, does not necessarily make him a great player. I think he will be a great one, but when you take a step back and objectively look at his performance last year, it can give you a better picture of what his actual level of production was.
Bradford’s receivers certainly contributed to his low numbers. Yes, he was a rookie. Yes, he learned a new offense. You take all those things into account. At the end of the day, Sam played how he played. Will he get better? Yes. Will better receivers help? Yes. Will more time in the league help? Yes. But, in his rookie year, Sam did what he did and compared to the performance of other QBs (yes, ones with better receivers and more experience) you can see that his performance really was not that special.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 3:31 PM CST up reply actions
I understand your point
and I see that this is not going anywhere. I do think it’s hard to believe Fitzpatrick has the intangibles Bradford has. I do think offensive players who are frustrated with their good play being hindered by QB play will want to perform better if a new QB with some real promise needs some help to rise up. I understand that you think everyone in the NFL works 100% to keep their slot no matter the circumstances but I believe that is false. I do think the media gushing over Sam makes the team want to help him out in the media’s eyes, especially if he’s likable. I understand Sam’s numbers were not tops in the league but I believe he performed in his spot better than all but 7 other QB’s in the league, suggesting he is a top 10 guy. These seem to be the points we disagree on and I can respect that, but you can’t claim these stats being mediocre as Sam being mediocre if that was your point. The stats are mediocre, duly noted.
Julio Jones for Rams 2011
Not to beat a dead horse
but it is only hard to believe that about Fitzpatrick because the media hypes up Bradford. Perception vs. Reality
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 10:05 PM CST up reply actions
btw....
i cant wait to see marmie on espn.. he sounds like just the guy for the analyst job lol …. i dont care wat hes sayin at all… im pretty sure the ppls on tv no more than this wierdo…and theyre sayin otherwise… i mean you dont see alex smith winnin anything or settin records.. he wonteven be in the league in 2 yrs anyway
You missed the entire point
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 8:33 AM CST up reply actions
This has to be one of the lamest comparisons ever!
Fitzpatrick?! Seriously LOL
I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed but even I can see the difference between these two. Maybe Fitz could have won as many games this season but that’s a pretty short sided way of looking at things. From the first moment I watched Bradford throw I could tell he had “it”. Stas are for baseball geeks and have no place in football! Too many variables on the grid iron.
There are maybe 4 QBs I’d swap Bradford for and I suspect in another year this number will drop.
The scary thing about Sam is he didn’t even come close to showing off his arm due to the offense we were running and the poor ability of our WRs. He did have a few rough games but he was rushed into starting. Considering this I think it’s amazing he didn’t have more. I don’t see Sam doing anything but improving. Micro analyzing stats does little to sway my confidence in this. Granted it’s a gut feeling that I have no interest in trying to proofs with stats but good god man did you see him play?
What
did you see in that first throw that led you to conclude that Bradford was better than Fitzpatrick? Please enlighten me as to what you see in the way Manning, Brady, Rivers, Cutler, Keith Null, Kyle Boller, and Thaddeus Lewis throw that makes them successful or unsuccessful.
I’d love to hear it.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 3:34 PM CST up reply actions
After watching Bulger weak ass throwing arm
I suppose it was just shock of seeing solid throws made without looking labored. His throws looked a hell of a lot more like Manning’s and River’s than Null’s or Boller’s. This was good enough for me. He met my expectations with what I thought he would be able to do with this team and actually was an eyelash away from exceeding my expectations. Micro analyzing stats doesn’t really invalidate my opinion of where Sam is as a QB. In time as the team matures his stats will improve and a lot of his low statistical numbers are as more a reflection on the game plans he was being asked to execute. Am I too high on Sam? Probably but how the hell else should I be? Do you have any clue how painful the three previous seasons were? Sam gives us a chance and by god I’m backing him 100% and as far ad I’m concerned he is the best QB in the NFL. To be honest I can’t be objective in this matter but I suspect if I could I’d still say the kid has a bright future.
He was good enough to win 7 games
which is more than enough for me in his first year. Quit nitpicking, he’s a rookie. He played as well as we asked him to. The season is over now.
"I kind of stepped my swagger up. You look at the Madden game and the swagger's so low, maybe they'll bump me up. Before it was a meatball flex, so you've got to liven it up a little bit." - Animal Jr.
I asked him
to win a Super Bowl, so he failed me. Gosh, is it so hard to read what I wrote and just respond to that instead of saying that he is a rookie.
Maybe, these are just some interesting stats that show he still has a long way to go.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 5:27 PM CST up reply actions
I read what you wrote and clearly,
I responded, it’s just what you wanted to see, I guess. I just chose not to get into it. This isn’t the first time you called out Bradford, I’m obviously not going to change your mind with an argument. What else do you want me to say? He is a rookie and he played well for one. Asking for a Super Bowl as a rookie just makes you crazy, no rookie has won one (and I also didn’t see that in the article).
Yes, he definitely still has a long ways to go. No one is saying he’s greater than Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, we’re just extremely excited for the future from what we’ve seen of him.
"I kind of stepped my swagger up. You look at the Madden game and the swagger's so low, maybe they'll bump me up. Before it was a meatball flex, so you've got to liven it up a little bit." - Animal Jr.
And don't get me wrong,
what you’re saying is definitely true. If anything, people getting so mad over it shows how true it is. It’s just something that we already know in the back of our minds and don’t like reading. I look at Sam’s 76.5 qb rating and I wish it were 85. I look at Sam’s 3,500 yards and I wish it were 4,000. I look at his 18 touchdown’s and I wish it were 25. I look at his 15 picks and I wish it were at least 12. By no means was this a statistically good season by NFL standards, but it really was a good one for a rookie and he did much better than anyone could have imagined in leading this team the way he did from the start and winning the locker room like that. Even you should be able to acknowledge that. I’m not beating myself up over it, I know he’s going to exceed all of those numbers multiple times in the future. You shouldn’t have to beat him up over it too, it’s not like he’s satisfied at all with his season.
"I kind of stepped my swagger up. You look at the Madden game and the swagger's so low, maybe they'll bump me up. Before it was a meatball flex, so you've got to liven it up a little bit." - Animal Jr.
Very good
That is really all I am saying, here. I am not trying to beat Sam up. I think that fact he rated so poorly in those statistics colored the perception of my point. I did not make the stats say he was 34th, he just ranked there. I did not make him 2nd last in Y/A, that is just how he performed.
On a website dedicated to the Rams, I’d like to see better analysis than “Bradford is so good. He gives the team hope.” There is too much of that surface-level, flowery “analysis” everywhere else.
Let’s really break this team down and give credit where credit is due. I am not saying that I thought Bradford was the 34th best QB in the league, but he DID rate there by perhaps the most telling statistic in QB performance. When I saw that, it made me stop and think, “Wow, if Sam rates like this, why have the Rams won more games?” The answer came to me in mostly two reasons.
1. Our defense, which had a markedly improved DVOA rating from the previous years.
2. Our weak schedule, which was the weakest in the NFL.
I am not hating on Sam just because I don’t think that he was God-send that took us from one win to eight. His performance was definitely an improvement over the combined performance of trifecta that we sent out there last season. No doubt about that. But, there are a good amount of QBs that could have done what Sam did this year (and yes, I am comparing a rookie to veterans and understand he has poor WRs.)
So, I think he’ll be a heckuva player, too. I don’t think that anything he will do in future could surprise me and I am very excited for it. But, he just wasn’t one of the top two reasons that the Rams’ record improved this year; he was third most important. He was just a rookie QB that had a pretty good rookie season. In my opinion, it was not as good as Ryan, Roethlisberger, or Flacco’s respective rookie seasons, but it was still very good, and I think his career will trump all three of those guys.
I can also admit that it kind of depends on your perspective. I view Sam’s performance through the view that, relative to the league, it was not that special. However, relative to the combined performance of the three guys we sent out there last year, it was very good. Let’s just hold off on crowning him just yet. Make him earn the praise, just like every other Ram.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 8, 2011 10:03 AM CST up reply actions
i agree in general
but dude. the teams that Ryan, Flacco and especially Roethlisberger are not comparable.
Flacco will not be an elite QB in the NFL. but he is good because his defense is elite. Likewise with Big Ben.
The Falcons have bonafide weapons for Ryan and a solid defense (although I’d argue ours is better this year than theirs in his rookie year)
I think he has pretty much already earned the praise, and now he needs to keep on earning it. What he has done regardless of metrics has been excellent, but just because he played on a 1-15 his metrics are brought down. I think that Fitzpatrick and Smith would have done worse in this offense because they just do not have the talent that we saw from sam on a consistent basis throughout the season. he could have been better yes, but he was still excellent and he helped the rams win more games than other teams with better supporting casts.
The defense was stellar this year, but this is helped significantly by the improvement in the offense under Bradford with a weaker run game.
Bradford to Onobun!
I agree with what you said
except maybe the Flacco statement. Big Ben was insane but he did have that dominant defense behind him. Flacco also had a dominant defense and wasn’t leaned on as much as Sam was. Ryan was very good, gotta give him that, but the Falcons worked the play action so well because Michael Turner was as good as it gets that year. SJ didn’t have a year like Turner did in ‘08 and I think it made it harder on Sam. I’d say Peyton is the best comparison given the circumstances. Worse team in the league the year before leaning on a rookie quarterback. Your points were spot on but I don’t blame people for calling you a “Sam hater” because you did come off as extremely hard on him.
"I kind of stepped my swagger up. You look at the Madden game and the swagger's so low, maybe they'll bump me up. Before it was a meatball flex, so you've got to liven it up a little bit." - Animal Jr.
And just so we're clear,
I hate the term hater and do not think you’re a hater of any kind lol.
"I kind of stepped my swagger up. You look at the Madden game and the swagger's so low, maybe they'll bump me up. Before it was a meatball flex, so you've got to liven it up a little bit." - Animal Jr.
Haha, thanks man
You are right that they did play on better teams with better defenses. If you didn’t already do it, check out Flacco’s rookie stats, they might be better than you thought.
Thanks for bringing some rationality here. I appreciate it.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 9, 2011 9:18 AM CST up reply actions
After reading all these posts
And all the accusations of hater. I’ve decided that not only was Marmie correct, but he proved his point absolutely. I swear if he was a prosecuting attorney, he could state the people rest smile and sit back down at the table. He never hated on Sam Bradford but he proved that being critical can be received on here as sacrilege. I know I"ll get hammered for this, because I admittedly wanted and still would take Suh, over Bradford, last year, but he’s right, you could plug in Jim Jones name for Sam Bradford. I think Sam’s great, not my choice, but I’m glad he’s a Ram. But now that he’s a Ram, it’s OK to both praise and question him.
I too think stats are overrated, but intangibles are just that, unmeasurable. We improved because of many things, every young guy got another year of experience, including our young coaches is the biggest reason, IMHO, along with SoS. There’s obviouly a much higher limit to how much you can credit Sam than how much you can critique him, here. I appreciate this post for it’s role in keeping us at TST a little more honest.
Wolf. Wolfgang Wolf
Thanks
Someone else can actually read what I wrote and avoid the knee-jerk reaction of “Oh, my God this guy wrote about Bradford and didn’t call him the best thing to ever happen to the St. Louis Rams.”
Just by noticing and showing that Sam finished very poorly in some stats does not mean I don’t like him or the Rams.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 8:13 PM CST up reply actions
Thank you
Glad to see someone else can see it is ok to question our rookie quarterback.
Agreed,
None of these guys came on here last year defending Keith Null because he was a rookie. No, he got torn to shreds.
That was really my biggest point, Bradford gets perceived as being this golden boy just because he was our #1 pick. It has gotten to the point that just saying Bradford gets too much credit and citing some statistics somehow makes you not a fan of the Rams. Just crazy nonsense.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 10:50 PM CST up reply actions
I'm surprised anyone still wants Suh.
He just had arguably the greatest rookie season in NFL history but I still doubt we win more than 4 games if we drafted him and kept Bulger. Bulger lost the locker room, we needed a change. It would be nice to see Suh in horns in the future though…but I firm believe Sam was the right choice for this franchise.
"I kind of stepped my swagger up. You look at the Madden game and the swagger's so low, maybe they'll bump me up. Before it was a meatball flex, so you've got to liven it up a little bit." - Animal Jr.
Not saying I disagree nor trying to argue here
but I personally knew the former equipment manager Todd Hewitt (not the best source but a source none the less) and I had talked to him about numerous things and the team being behind Bulger being one of them. He said that all the players supported and respected Bulger and wished him nothing but the best when he did leave. And yes Sam was the right choice.
Yeah they probably
were behind him since this is a great group of guys but I wouldn’t doubt that they lost confidence in his abilities. That’s pretty cool that you know Todd too, sucks he was let go.
"I kind of stepped my swagger up. You look at the Madden game and the swagger's so low, maybe they'll bump me up. Before it was a meatball flex, so you've got to liven it up a little bit." - Animal Jr.
Dude
Marmie is all about getting post. He trashes Sam everytime he gets the chance, I really believe he is a 49ers fan in drag. He writes garbage and then defends it by saying how much he likes Sam.
Which is it Marm? you can’t have both worlds, you either like him or you don’t. Don’t confuse the issue by saying one thing and trying to blow it off by saying the opposite.
Wow what some folks will do to get a reaction…..why don’t you go back to the 49ers blog where you belong.
Nerd
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 7, 2011 7:48 PM CST up reply actions
good feedback
intelligent and reasonable (blue fonted post)
"And a boring game for boring people. Did you ever watch golf on television? It's like watching flies FUCK. Think of the intellect it must take to draw pleasure from this activity: hitting a ball with a crooked stick and then WALKING AFTER IT" -George Carlin
Can I suggest we just let this thread go?
Nothing new is being added to the discussion, and name calling doesn’t help anything. Marmie made his point. Everyone else has had a chance to respond. Let’s just let it go and move on to more positive threads.
I like that you are playing devils advocate here
but the bottom line that’s been laid by everyone is that in terms of rookie performances Sam Bradford has been one of the best Rookie QB’s of all time.
Not only the intangibles but something that is oft overlooked is how many snaps he took. He was one of only 3 players to take all snaps at QB all season.
If you have consistency at QB which we have now everything around him will improve, regardless of the talent at QB. Of course it helps he can hit people on the money, extend plays and hand the ball off to SJax quite well..
Bradford to Onobun!
Hype => Ticket Sales
Sam may not have had a great season for an NFL quarterback (for a rookie I know he did), but in the eyes of the Rams’ organization and leadership it was a great season. He put fans in the seats and generated quite a bit of buzz, both locally and nationally. More revenue means more FA signings and a willingness to keep the team in St. Louis.
Footnote: Sam helped put fans in the seats
I will not say he is solely responsible, of course, but was a main attraction.
This just proves what I am saying
The national “experts” give superficial, surface-level analysis of the Rams success. This show is no exception. They don’t have time to really analyze each team, so they take the easy way out and regurgitate the easiest storyline to tell.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 8, 2011 5:52 PM CST reply actions
it also shows that bradford had the second best
rookie season as a qb in NFL history.
How?
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 8, 2011 11:33 PM CST up reply actions
Well I'd say 3rd...
Peyton Manning #1. Matt Ryan #2.
I have no idea how well Marino and Elway did in their rookie years off the top of my head.
There’s a je ne sais quoi about sam that gives the impression of hope beyond media hyperbole that surrounds players like Flacco and Tebow. Sam just has an IT factor and while I will never use this as a basis for a point I think it’s apparent to pretty much everyone and as such we go for the easy way out in terms of analysis.
Sam has the IT factor the same way Clausen does not.
Bradford to Onobun!
That is the easy way of
saying Sam is better but you have no idea why, so you just say something that has no way of being tested, proved, or challenged.
Remember the great 2004 and 2005 Rams teams...
by Marmie is the best on Feb 9, 2011 9:19 AM CST up reply actions
yeah it's not the basis of my argument, but i and many many more would agree that Sam just has IT
something that isn’t quantifiable and measurable, but still significant.
The more accepted way of looking at a player is statistics and a stlcardsfan4 says below they don’t agree with you.
I’d say watching him play several things jump out.
His accuracy when throwing down the field. The velocity and catchability of his throws, his poise, his athleticism, not forcing throws/taking what D is giving him, his confidence when running the no huddle etc.
downside: batted balls, some bad decisions (notably being baited into the pick 6 in NO and vs Seattle forcing it to Gibson).
Thats a lot of positive vs negative, and I’d be intrigued to see if you can say which QB’s have done better than that as rookies?
Fitzpatrick and/or Alex Smith in this offense would not have been as successful as Sam was.
Combine the IT factor with favourable stats and things you can see from gametape, i just don’t see how you can say Sam didn’t have an amazing rookie year.
He was indeed middling in terms of production, but from rookie levels he was way up there and elite (rookie wise).
Bradford to Onobun!
the only thing we have is statistics
and those don’t agree with you
"And a boring game for boring people. Did you ever watch golf on television? It's like watching flies FUCK. Think of the intellect it must take to draw pleasure from this activity: hitting a ball with a crooked stick and then WALKING AFTER IT" -George Carlin
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Turf Show Times
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Cover the web with Turf
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
